• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Episode 2 Released!

Prolescum

New Member
arg-fallbackName="Prolescum"/>
Well, to paraphrase Douglas Adams, we love deadlines - especially the sound they make as they go whizzing by...

Without further ado, I present to you, episode 2 of The League of Reason Presents...




You can follow along by checking the show notes here

An mp3 file is available here

We're still considering topics for episode 3, and you can add your thoughts and suggestions here, and feel free to crucify us below :D
 
arg-fallbackName="australopithecus"/>
Not bad at all, there's definitely an improvement and it flowed more naturally than the first episode.
 
arg-fallbackName="Anachronous Rex"/>
Inferno said:
Stopp. :mrgreen:


Note to Rex: It's "Gute Zeiten", assuming you want to say "good times". ;)
It was actually a complete guess (I only know a little Swedish), I'm surprised I got anything right at all.
 
arg-fallbackName="Noth"/>
Is everything we said would be in the discription really in the discription?
Will need to listen to the entire thing again just to make sure, but I believe somewhere at the start Inferno or I makes a comment that the listeners can find certain info in the discription bar.

Anyway, rest of you people here: give us your critique. I can't stand listening to myself for too long so I won't be able to judge it myself properly :p :lol:
 
arg-fallbackName="Prolescum"/>
Noth said:
Is everything we said would be in the discription really in the discription?
Will need to listen to the entire thing again just to make sure, but I believe somewhere at the start Inferno or I makes a comment that the listeners can find certain info in the discription bar.

Anyway, rest of you people here: give us your critique. I can't stand listening to myself for too long so I won't be able to judge it myself properly :p :lol:

Well there's a link to the show notes, which has most of the stuff we talked about I think. Let me know if there's 'owt missing and I'll add it.
 
arg-fallbackName="Noth"/>
Prolescum said:
Aw well, yeah we can blame Noth for all the... hang on, eh? Oh!

:)

I'm good with taking the blame, trust me ;)
Blame-taking expert! If not responsibility :lol:
 
arg-fallbackName="Prolescum"/>
I've had a discussion with a chap over on YouTube. I'd like some other members to voice their opinions, including him (I am presuming his gender) if he decides to stop by.

In the show, we briefly touched on Thomas Edison and Nikola Tesla. We made some factual errors, but it is signposted as a tangent during the episode (i.e., we had done no research before the recording).
@luccaskunk said:
The Electric Chair was *NOT* used to promote, it was used to CONDEMN the power. Basically, Edison invented the electric chair to be powered off DC current and used DC current to electrocute elephants to death to demonstrate that Tesla's DC current was dangerous. Edison = AC,, Tesla = DC. And the fact that you then offhandedly used your ignorance of the issue as a cheap shot on America... You have no idea how foolish you guys looked when you did that.

Above, he correctly notes the error, and proceeds to make a mistake (confusing AC/DC) five times, attributes the invention of the electric chair erroneously to Edison, and describes Inferno's off-hand remark as an ignorant cheap shot at America.
I said:
"[Tesla] is best known for developing the modern alternating current (AC) electrical supply system."
@ wikipedia --> wiki/Nikola_Tesla
I also suggest the following to correct some other errors in your post:
wiki/Harold_P._Brown
wiki/Thomas_Edison
Calling us, foolish is uncalled for considering your own mistakes.

Which I admit is a bit arsey.
@luccaskunk said:
@Prolescum Sorry, I typed it out in haste. But yes, I, had the AC/DC backwards. I'm surprised I made that mistake, because in the end, it was Tesla's ideas that won out. Still, it wasn't about "oh my form can kill people, so it's better" it's about "look, his form can kill people, mine's safer". Saying it's the other way around and using it to take a pot shot at America is beyond ignorant.

The casual error (acknowledged earlier on and not disputed at any point - see @tanzanite7's post below) is no longer an ignorant, foolish cheap shot but beyond ignorant, and after "simply typing it [his error] wrong" five times and reiterating his assertion that Edison invented the chair, he then accused us of a "smug sense of nationalistic superiority".
@luccaskunk said:
So, you guys said that "only in America would something like that work". I say, "only outside of America would ignorance of a subject lead to a smug sense of nationalistic superiority." Yes, I misspoke about which one was AC and which one was DC. Big freaking deal. I knew it in my head the correct way around and simply typed it wrong. I was correct on the other details, such as motivation, who electrocuted what, and invented the electric chair. You guys certainly were not.

At this point I mention that the constraints of YouTube's comment system is a hindrance, and note that if we are to have a decent conversation, he should come to the forum. Note that I say we cannot have an effective discussion.
I said:
As I've said, if you want to discuss our "smug sense of nationalistic superiority", by all means, use the better venue - the league's forum. We cannot have an effective discussion with a 500 character limit.
Also, you are still wrong about who invented the chair (I proffered the link earlier in this conversation - perhaps you missed it in your haste).
It is bed time, for me here in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, birthplace of smug nationalistic superiority.

The next two posts were from roughly the same time, but not part of the same thread - here for completeness:
@luccaskunk said:
@Prolescum watch?v=RkBU3aYsf0Q Here we have Edison electrocuting "Topsy the Elephant" in an effort to demonstrate that AC electricity is dangerous. He's, not trying to show the power and therefore the merit of AC, he's trying to show the danger of AC. Ironically enough, if you grab a live AC wire, you're more likely to be forced by the electricity to let go, where Edison's DC would be far more likely to force you to hold on and get electrocuted.

I said:
@luccaskunk This point (Edison electrocuting things) was not contested. Thank you for, the video.

He then goes on, possibly distracted by the shifting goalposts:
@luccaskunk said:
@Prolescum I don't need more than 500 characters to point out that Harold Brown was an employee of Edison at the time, of the invention. I also don't need more than 500 characters to point out that Edison hired him for the express purpose of inventing the electric chair. Nor do I need more than 500 characters to mention that Edison's name was on the patent application. Lastly, I don't need 500 character to do it in a verbose fashion with redundant wording. Your move, Bucko.

@luccaskunk said:
Oh wait, self correction. I went fact hunting. It seems that a patent for the electric chair was never, issued. So at this point arguing who invented it, Brown or Edison, is kind of moot. Brown was working for Edison to find ways to demonstrate that AC electricity is dangerous. End of story, full stop.

He then goes back to the original poster who noted our error some hours prior to his initial tirade:
@tanzanite7 said:
Correction: Edison used the electrocuting of elephants to mislead the, common-man of the dangers of alternating current - for obvious reasons.

I said:
@tanzanite7 Excellent stuff, thank, you.

@luccaskunk said:
@tanzanite7 I tried to, explain that to them, they're apparently closed to reality. Seriously, I used to respect these guys. But with all the wild, "off the cuff" statements made without at least a modicum of research, and an arrogant steadfastness to their distorted reality, I've lost respect.
I'm going back to the more rational side of the atheist community on YouTube. You know, the one where reason actually exists.

We apparently are now "closed to reality", have made "all the wild 'off the cuff' statements", and have an "arrogant steadfastness to our distorted reality". He states that he's going back to the "more rational side of the atheist community".

I suspect to act as a counterweight.
I said:
@luccaskunk I initially invited you to discuss Inferno's comment (the issue you raised) at the forum, not who invented what. That conversation was a tangent during the recording but we kept it in as it led into something else. @tanzanite7 noticed the error first, and was thanked.
I've tried to be courteous to you because you took the time to watch, but your arse-over-tit reaction here has cemented in my mind that you're anything but rational., I wouldn't expect a further reply from me.
Good day

Of course, he and I have since responded again.
@luccaskunk said:
@Prolescum Thanked, and yet you guys haven't gone and added an annotation correcting the statement, let alone adding something to the video description. Well golly gee! That shows all kinds of intellectual honesty there!
I'm, not interested in joining the League of Reason's forums if you guys are a bunch of pompous know-it-alls that make snide remarks about other countries based on ignorance, and then won't correct yourself when you're called out on it. No, refuse.

I said:
@luccaskunk You must be congratulated on your wanton abandonment of any semblance of maturity. The hours spent throwing insults for an acknowledged error in a light-hearted podcast by amateurs will hopefully satiate your baser desires, saving others from your otherwise impotent wrath for a time.
It would have been corrected in due course, yet you thought ignominiously waving your dick was the most reasonable, course of action.
I'll probably discuss your posts at the league forum. Come join me.

I hopefully won't respond again there, but I sincerely want him to come over to discuss it sensibly.


What are your reactions to this discussion?
 
arg-fallbackName="australopithecus"/>
Obviously things need to be researched before the show is put together, and that clearly happens as per the show notes. But it's a bit much to expect that everything is 100% accurate, especially given it was a tangent and as you said, you pointed out no research was done pre-show on the subject. Just looks like point scoring to me.
 
arg-fallbackName="Prolescum"/>
...and so it continues.
@luccaskunk said:
@Prolescum Acknowledged? Really? Not when I made my initial comments it wasn't. You're back pedaling and want me to join your forums? Really? That's not exactly neutral territory, mate. You've got to do better than defend nationalistic prejudice until someone twists your arm into publicly admitting the error if you want me to join your forums. No, sorry, I have no interest in throwing, myself before a bunch of nationalistic pricks on their own turf. Unsubbed, gone to magic sandwhich.

I said:
@luccaskunk You're, quite simply, verifiably wrong here; about when it was acknowledged and the integrity of members at the league's forum. Your comical petulance aside, if your argument is strong enough, why do you think it would not be recognised as such at the league of reason? The offer of a civil discussion still stands, and you can read the, discussion thread linked in the description bar at any time.

So...

[centre]
screeniepop.png
[/centre]
 
arg-fallbackName="Noth"/>
Before I weigh in on that tidbit, can two annotations be implemented into the video?
1) Reichstagsbrand blamed on communists, not Jews.

2) Electric Chair bit is actually backwards as was pointed out in the comments.

Not just to ease the mind of this clearly upset individual, but because I made a concession to see it done xD

I stand by what I commented to him in the YT comment section:
He's throwing a fit where none is needed. The correction he suggested was already suggested and acknowledged as can be seen above in Prole's screen caps and - contrary to what he might think - we're not above admitting we've made factual errors, as long as we keep to our (my?) word of annotations.
 
arg-fallbackName="Prolescum"/>
Noth said:
Before I weigh in on that tidbit, can two annotations be implemented into the video?
1) Reichstagsbrand blamed on communists, not Jews.

2) Electric Chair bit is actually backwards as was pointed out in the comments.

Not just to ease the mind of this clearly upset individual, but because I made a concession to see it done xD

I added annotations (and put corrections in the description bar) early this evening.
I stand by what I commented to him in the YT comment section:
He's throwing a fit where none is needed. The correction he suggested was already suggested and acknowledged as can be seen above in Prole's screen caps and - contrary to what he might think - we're not above admitting we've made factual errors, as long as we keep to our (my?) word of annotations.

I agree with you, and I think it's unfortunate the way it's turned out, I'm just irritated at being provoked into countering increasingly hostile (and progressively less accurate) charges within YouTube's character limit.

I would very much like to address his "smug nationalistic superiority" comments, but there's no point if he's unwilling to listen.
 
arg-fallbackName="Noth"/>
I added annotations (and put corrections in the description bar) early this evening.

My bad for not checking, and: awesome :)

And no, I don't really think he'll be reasoned with. I think it's best to let this one die out over time.

Anyway, I think the reactions so far are pretty positive, although I wouldn't mind seeing a viewer increase :)
 
arg-fallbackName="Noth"/>
I can be very demanding. Give me the viewers or off with their heads!
(You're pardoned)
:lol:
 
arg-fallbackName="Prolescum"/>
Noth said:
I can be very demanding. Give me the viewers or off with their heads!
(You're pardoned)
:lol:

Well as of right now, it's at 875 views. That's nearly 880 views!
 
arg-fallbackName="CosmicJoghurt"/>
Prolescum said:
Noth said:
I can be very demanding. Give me the viewers or off with their heads!
(You're pardoned)
:lol:

Well as of right now, it's at 875 views. That's nearly 880 views!
Nearly 1000 from my point of view! We're a bit closer to 10,000!
 
Back
Top